Newsgroups: sci.lang,sci.bio.entomology.lepidoptera
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!world!jcf
From: jcf@world.std.com (Joseph C Fineman)
Subject: Re: Etymology of Butterfly
Message-ID: <Cz2xIq.DLp@world.std.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
References: <1994Nov10.105243.29796@ac.dal.ca>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 01:30:26 GMT
Lines: 25
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.lang:32724 sci.bio.entomology.lepidoptera:103

nextug@ac.dal.ca (Christopher Majka) writes:

>There exists *no* species of lepidopterans (butterflies or moths)
>whose larval food consists of dung. Most feed on plants; a relatively
>small number are predators of aphids or other small insects.The adult
>butterfly has a proboscis through which it can suck up fluids and
>thus, if fact, is only able to 'drink' and not really 'feed' (if
>'feeding' is understood to be ingesting solid food while drinking is
>understood as ingesting liquids.)

>Certain butterflies or moths are, as adults, attracted to excrement,
>rotting fruit, urine, carrion, mud or other such odoriferous and/or
>unlikely substances. Research has shown that principal function of
>this is to acquire sodium which both males and females require for
>reproduction. Some species, in some situations, also use this
>technique to acquire nitrogen or certain amino acids.

Fair enough, but if people see butterflies hang around dung for
whatever reason, it is plausible that they might name them after it.
The habits of the adult are _more_ likely than those of the larva to
give rise to such a naming.
-- 
        Joe Fineman             jcf@world.std.com
        239 Clinton Road        (617) 731-9190
        Brookline, MA 02146
